From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750899AbWEISoL (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 May 2006 14:44:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751049AbWEISoL (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 May 2006 14:44:11 -0400 Received: from [194.90.237.34] ([194.90.237.34]:2882 "EHLO mtlexch01.mtl.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750899AbWEISoK (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 May 2006 14:44:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 21:44:52 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Shirley Ma Cc: Hoang-Nam Nguyen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Marcus Eder , openib-general@openib.org, openib-general-bounces@openib.org, Christoph Raisch , Roland Dreier Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH 07/16] ehca: interrupt handling routines Message-ID: <20060509184451.GF22825@mellanox.co.il> Reply-To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" References: <20060509164919.GC5063@mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 May 2006 18:47:51.0734 (UTC) FILETIME=[13486560:01C67399] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting r. Shirley Ma : > According to some results from different resouces, NAPI only gives 3%-10% performance improvement on single CQ. When you say performance you mean bandwidth. But I think it should improve the CPU utilization on RX side significantly. If it does, that an important metric as well. > I am trying a simple NAPI patch on splitting CQ now to see how much performance there. What are you using for a benchmark? -- MST